Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 85 references

A Roadmap for Transient Hunters: Mapping Stellar Mass and Star Formation Rate Anisotropies in the Local Universe

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Sky maps of galaxy mass and star formation point to transient hotspots

desk verdict Useful, honest data product for survey planners, but the uncorrected sky-coverage incompleteness in REGALADE is a real soft spot that should be addressed before the maps are used as a quantitative roadmap. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05531 v1 pith:27IGBX5M submitted 2026-08-06 astro-ph.HE

Ye-Hao Cheng , Yuan-Pei Yang , Ye Li This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.HE
keywords StarformationStellarmassesSkysurveysTransientdetectionTimedomainastronomyAngularpowerspectrumGalaxycatalogCore-collapsesupernovae
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that the anisotropic sky distributions of galaxy stellar mass and star formation rate out to about 200 Mpc can serve as a practical roadmap for transient surveys, especially for telescopes with fields of view of a few to tens of square degrees. It builds all-sky maps from a large galaxy catalog, predicts star formation rates for galaxies lacking them, and bins the total stellar mass and SFR into pixels matched to telescope fields of view and distance thresholds. The maps show strong large-scale structures that fade toward isotropy as the distance limit grows, and the angular power spectra and fluctuations of both quantities drop rapidly with distance. A qualitative comparison with core-collapse supernovae finds that confirmed explosions cluster in the same prominent structures as the SFR maps. If the maps are correct, pointing at their overdensities should raise the probability of discovering local transients compared with blind scanning.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the mapping of total stellar mass and SFR per equal-area HEALPix pixel, with pixel size set by telescope field of view and the galaxy sample cut by luminosity distance. Transient rates are connected to the maps through the two-component 'A+B' model, Rate = A (M*/$10^{10}$ Msun) + B (SFR/10 Msun/yr), so events with short delays follow the SFR field and delayed events follow a mix of stellar mass and SFR. The SFR field itself rests on a CatBoost regressor, and the angular power spectrum and fluctuation statistic quantify how fast anisotropy dies with distance.

What would settle it

Compare the maps against a volume-limited galaxy sample built from a different all-sky catalog with independent distance and SFR estimates; if the dominant anisotropy changes when the catalog changes, the maps partly encode selection. A stronger test would run a uniform wide-field transient survey within 200 Mpc and check that observed events per pixel follow the maps after accounting for the survey's own selection function, with a mismatch tracking the catalog's known gaps (Galactic plane, LMC/SMC directions) falsifying the roadmap.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using the REGALADE galaxy catalog, the paper constructs all-sky maps of total stellar mass and total star formation rate for galaxies within 200 Mpc, at angular resolutions of 1.83 degrees, 7.33 degrees, and 58.6 degrees matched to the fields of view of Mephisto, ZTF, and Einstein Probe, and for distance thresholds from 30 to 200 Mpc. Star formation rates for 325,807 galaxies are predicted with a CatBoost model trained on GSWLC-2 measurements, giving a complete SFR census of 364,148 galaxies. The central claim is that these distributions, which the paper calls a roadmap for transient hunters, trace the expected rate densities of local transients: stellar-mass-linked events such as Type Ia supernovae and compact-object mergers track the stellar mass maps, while SFR-linked events such as core-collapse supernovae and long gamma-ray bursts track the SFR maps. The maps become increasingly isotropic with distance, and the angular power spectra and relative fluctuations of both fields decline rapidly, quantifying the zone within which anisotropy actually matters for survey design.

Load-bearing premise

The maps assume that uneven sky coverage and depth in the underlying galaxy catalog do not create the large-scale patterns, so those patterns reflect real matter and star formation rather than survey selection.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A medium-field telescope that points its exposures at the overdense pixels in these maps should discover more local transients per pointing than one that scans blindly.
  • The published dataset lets any survey choose its own pixel size and distance cut, so the roadmap generalizes to fields of view beyond the three example telescopes.
  • Because the stellar mass and SFR maps differ in their angular power spectra, mass-linked and SFR-linked transients should show measurably different sky clustering in the local universe.
  • The rapid decline of anisotropy beyond roughly 100-180 Mpc means survey optimization from these maps matters mainly for nearby targets; beyond that, blind scanning loses little.
  • The maps can serve as intrinsic prior maps onto which a future uniform survey's selection function can be convolved for quantitative transient-rate studies.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct test would be to simulate a survey with known cadence and sensitivity, draw transient rates from the maps, and check that the pointing strategy maximizing recovered events matches the map overdensities; the paper does not run this simulation.
  • The strongest systematic risk not tested in the paper is that the SFR model, trained on SDSS-footprint galaxies, may carry photometric-system biases when applied all-sky; comparing predicted SFRs for galaxies with independent UV/IR SFR estimates outside the SDSS footprint would settle this.
  • The maps could be combined with transient rate densities per unit stellar mass and SFR to forecast relative event rates for different transient classes, not just spatial patterns; the paper stops at spatial correlation.
  • Near the Galactic plane and the LMC/SMC directions, catalog incompleteness could suppress apparent densities, so surveys should treat those regions as lower-confidence zones.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper constructs all-sky maps of galaxy stellar mass and star formation rate (SFR) within luminosity-distance thresholds of 30-200 Mpc, at angular resolutions matched to the fields of view of Mephisto, ZTF, and Einstein Probe. The maps are built from the REGALADE galaxy catalog, with SFRs for 325,807 galaxies predicted by a CatBoost model trained on GSWLC-2 labels and applied all-sky. The authors find that the stellar-mass and SFR maps share their main anisotropic structures, that these structures become weaker as the distance threshold increases, and that the angular power spectra and fluctuations decrease with distance. They also compare the SFR maps qualitatively with the sky distribution of core-collapse supernovae from BSN and TNS and report broad consistency in several prominent structures. The stated goal is to provide a 'roadmap' for transient surveys with medium fields of view.

Significance. If the maps faithfully represent the intrinsic nearby stellar-mass and SFR density fields, they would provide a practical, publicly available pointing prior for medium-field transient surveys and a flexible framework for matching angular resolution to a telescope's field of view. A clear strength is that the full dataset, training samples, and codes are released on Zenodo, and the authors are explicit that the supernova comparison is qualitative. However, the central survey-planning claim rests on the assumption that the observed large-scale anisotropies are astrophysical rather than imprints of the heterogeneous depth and sky coverage of the input catalogs, and on the assumption that a GSWLC-2-trained SFR model generalizes all-sky. These assumptions are acknowledged but not quantitatively tested, which is the main barrier to accepting the maps as a roadmap.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.2 and Figs. 3-4] The maps are raw HEALPix sums over REGALADE with no completeness or selection-function correction, even though the paper states in §2.2 that the catalog has 'non-uniform sky coverage and varying detection depths' and 'severe incompleteness near the Galactic plane and bulge region.' If the angular completeness pattern of the constituent surveys correlates with the claimed overdensities, the roadmap partly encodes which surveys covered which sky. Because this is load-bearing for the central claim, the authors should either apply or construct completeness weights for REGALADE, or demonstrate that the main structures in Figs. 3 and 4 survive when the analysis is restricted to regions with uniform coverage or repeated on individual constituent surveys. A quantitative comparison of the anisotropy maps with a survey-footprint map would also address the concern directly.
  2. [§2.3.3] The CatBoost SFR model is trained on GSWLC-2, whose training set is dominated by SDSS photometry, and is then applied to the full all-sky REGALADE sample. The features include g, r, z, W1, W2, redshift, and stellar mass, but the photometric systems supplying g, r, and z vary across the sky between Legacy Surveys, DELVE, and Pan-STARRS. The paper reports no test for systematic SFR bias as a function of sky region or photometric system. A concrete test would be to predict SFRs for a held-out all-sky sample with known SFRs outside the SDSS footprint, or to compare the feature distributions of the target sample with the training distribution; without such a test, the SFR maps may contain large-scale systematics that mimic or suppress the anisotropy signal.
  3. [§4.2 and Fig. 5] The angular power spectra in Fig. 5 are presented without error bars or any estimate of sample variance, mask-induced mode coupling, or completeness uncertainty. The main trend claim—that the power spectra decrease rapidly with increasing distance threshold—would be more convincing with at least jackknife or bootstrap uncertainties over independent sky regions, and with a discussion of how the ±10° Galactic-plane mask and the catalog completeness pattern affect the measured power at low and high multipoles. Without this, the reader cannot tell whether the reported decline to 'zero' at 180 Mpc is significant or an artifact of the mask and selection function.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Figs. 3-4] The color-bar labels 'log(M/M)' and 'log(SFR/M yr^-1)' are missing the solar-mass symbol and the proper superscript formatting; as printed they are easy to misread.
  2. [Fig. 5] The x-axis label 'line scale' is ambiguous; it should be labeled as multipole ℓ or as angular scale in degrees, and the panels would benefit from uncertainty bands.
  3. [§2.3.2 and Table 1] The training and blind-test RMSE values are both reported as 0.306 to three decimal places, which is suspicious for a CatBoost model; please clarify whether this reflects rounding or a metric that is dominated by the most common galaxy populations, and report the blind-test metrics separately with more precision.
  4. [§4.3] The authors correctly label the CCSN comparison as qualitative and list the selection biases of the input catalogs; a simple quantitative summary, such as a rank correlation between the SFR map and CCSN surface density after basic distance cuts, would strengthen the practical roadmap claim without overstating the selection-function control.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the sky maps are built from external galaxy-catalog data and the CCSN comparison is an explicitly qualitative consistency check, not a fitted prediction.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained against external benchmarks. The maps are built by summing stellar masses taken from REGALADE and SFRs taken from GSWLC-2 or predicted by a CatBoost model trained on GSWLC-2 labels; both catalogs are external to the transient samples, so the sky maps are not constructed from the CCSN data they are later compared with. The CCSN comparison in Section 4.3 is explicitly qualitative ('the comparison presented above is strictly qualitative in nature') and is a consistency check rather than a fitted prediction; no parameter is adjusted to make the maps agree with supernova positions. The self-citations to Cheng et al. 2025 and Yang et al. 2024 appear only as instrument references for the Mephisto field of view, not as load-bearing uniqueness or ansatz justifications. The acknowledged completeness and selection-function limitations of REGALADE and the cross-photometric extrapolation of the SFR model are genuine correctness risks, but they concern whether the maps trace intrinsic stellar mass and SFR rather than survey footprints; they do not make any prediction equivalent to its input by construction. Therefore no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central product is a catalog-derived map, not a derivation; the main ledger items are the fitted ML model and two coverage and transfer assumptions. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • CatBoost model parameters (trained on GSWLC-2) = RMSE = 0.306 dex on blind test
    The SFR sky maps are direct outputs of a fitted ML regression; the model's accuracy and any sky-dependent bias propagate into the anisotropy maps, so the fit is part of the central data product rather than a clean first-principles input.
  • Limiting stellar mass for dwarf incompleteness estimate = 10^8 M_sun
    Assumed minimum detectable mass at the distance threshold used in the dwarf-galaxy completeness estimate (Eq. 5, Section 4.1); affects the claim that dwarf incompleteness is negligible, but not the main maps.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Transient rates of old populations scale with stellar mass and young populations scale with SFR (A+B model, Eq. 1, Section 2.1).
    Underpins why stellar mass and SFR maps are chosen as proxies for transient rate densities; supported by cited DTD literature, but the maps themselves do not include rate normalization constants A and B.
  • ad hoc to paper GSWC-2 training labels are representative of the all-sky REGALADE population outside SDSS coverage.
    The CatBoost model is trained on a GSWLC-2 cross-match and then applied to roughly 326k galaxies with no spatial transfer test; sky-dependent photometric systematics could bias predicted SFR maps.
  • domain assumption REGALADE catalog incompleteness (Galactic plane, bulge, LMC/SMC direction) does not dominate the angular anisotropy on the scales used.
    Section 2.2 admits heterogeneous coverage; no completeness map is applied before computing sky distributions and power spectra, so large-scale patterns mix true structure with selection.
  • standard math HEALPix equal-area pixelization and angular power spectrum estimators are correctly implemented.
    Routine methodology in astrophysics; no formal verification but standard in the field.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Roadmap for Transient Hunters: Mapping Stellar Mass and Star Formation Rate Anisotropies in the Local Universe." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/27IGBX5M

@misc{pith2026260805531,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Roadmap for Transient Hunters: Mapping Stellar Mass and Star Formation Rate Anisotropies in the Local Universe},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/27IGBX5M}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05531}
}
read the original abstract

Over the past few decades, an increasing number of transients in nearby galaxies have been discovered through various survey projects. Unlike astrophysical phenomena at cosmological distances, transients in the local universe exhibit a pronounced anisotropy in their sky distribution. Consequently, adopting an appropriate survey strategy is essential to improve the efficiency of transient searches in the local universe. In this work, we utilized a large galaxy catalog to map the sky distributions of stellar mass and star formation rate (SFR) across different luminosity distance thresholds and angular resolutions of the grid on the celestial sphere. These maps can further serve to characterize the anisotropic spatial distribution of nearby extragalactic transients. For different angular resolutions of the celestial sphere, we find that the sky distributions of stellar mass of galaxies are similar to those of the SFR in the main anisotropic structures. As the luminosity distance threshold increases, the anisotropic structures of the sky distributions become more isotropic. We calculate the angular power spectra and fluctuations of the sky distribution of stellar mass and SFR at a given angular resolution and find that the angular power spectra and fluctuations decrease rapidly as the luminosity distance threshold increases. Finally, by qualitatively comparing the sky distribution of core-collapse supernovae with our SFR sky distribution, we find that the two exhibit consistent patterns in several prominent structures. The mapped sky distributions of stellar mass and SFR can serve as valuable references for future surveys in searching for extragalactic transients.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.05531 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Sky distribution of galaxies presented in equatorial coordinates for a luminosity distance threshold of 50 Mpc, with red circles marking the approximate locations of prominent galaxy groups and clusters. extract data from GSWLC-2 based on three condi￾tions that include SED fitting flag = OK, flag uv ̸= 1 and flag midir ̸= 0. These conditions guaran￾tee that SFRs are derived from broad-band SED fitting covering both … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison of predicted logSFR and corresponding residuals for the training (top row) and blind test (bottom row) datasets. Left panels: Predicted versus true logSFR values, where the red dashed line denotes the 1:1 relation and the pink shaded area represents the ±3σ region. Right panels: Probability density distributions of the residuals. The vertical red dashed line indicates the mean residual (µ), and the yellow… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Sky distribution of stellar mass in equatorial coordinates. From left to right, the angular resolutions of grid of sky distributions at each column are θ = 1.83◦ , 7.33◦ and 58.6 ◦ , respectively. From top to bottom, the luminosity distance thresholds of sky distributions at each row are 50 Mpc, 100 Mpc, 150 Mpc, and 200 Mpc, respectively. The color bar range spans three orders of magnitude if the stellar mass range… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Sky distribution of SFR in equatorial coordinates. From left to right, the angular resolution of the grid of sky distributions at each column are θ = 1.83◦ , 7.33◦ and 58.6 ◦ , respectively. From top to bottom, the luminosity distance thresholds of sky distributions at…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Angular power spectra of the sky distributions of stellar mass (left columns) and SFR (right columns) of galaxies in the resolution θ = 1.83◦ (top rows) and θ = 55 ′ (bottom rows) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Relative fluctuations in the sky distributions of stellar mass and SFR at different luminosity distance thresh￾olds (30 Mpc, 50 Mpc, 70 Mpc, 110 Mpc, 150 Mpc, 190 Mpc). alog 2 (BSN; Gal-Yam et al. 2013) and Transient Name Server (TNS)3 to match the sky distributions of…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison of the sky distribution of SFR with that of CCSNe. The left column displays the sky distributions of SFR of galaxies at an angular resolution of the grid θ = 55 ′ . The right column shows scatter plots of CCSNe. From top to bottom, the luminosity distance th…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

85 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T

    Abbott, B. P., Abbott, R., Abbott, T. D., et al. 2017, ApJL, 848, L13, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa920c

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa920c 2017

  2. [2]

    W., Kool, E

    Andreoni, I., Coughlin, M. W., Kool, E. C., et al. 2021, ApJ, 918, 63, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac0bc7

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac0bc7 2021

  3. [3]

    M., et al

    Arcavi, I., Gal-Yam, A., Kasliwal, M. M., et al. 2010, ApJ, 721, 777, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/721/1/777

    doi:10.1088/0004-637x/721/1/777 2010

  4. [4]

    1934, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 20, 254, doi: 10.1073/pnas.20.5.254

    Baade, W., & Zwicky, F. 1934, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 20, 254, doi: 10.1073/pnas.20.5.254

    doi:10.1073/pnas.20.5.254 1934

  5. [5]

    1996, A&A, 309, L35 16

    Bade, N., Komossa, S., & Dahlem, M. 1996, A&A, 309, L35 16

    1996

  6. [6]

    K., Driver, S

    Baldry, I. K., Driver, S. P., Loveday, J., et al. 2012, MNRAS, 421, 621, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.20340.x

    work page arXiv 2012

  7. [7]

    C., Kulkarni, S

    Bellm, E. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Graham, M. J., et al. 2019, PASP, 131, 018002, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/aaecbe 2019

  8. [8]

    K., Berger, E., Fong, W., et al

    Blanchard, P. K., Berger, E., Fong, W., et al. 2017, ApJL, 848, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9055

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa9055 2017

Show all 85 references
  1. [9]

    D., Ravi, V., Belov, K

    Bochenek, C. D., Ravi, V., Belov, K. V., et al. 2020, Nature, 587, 59, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2872-x

    2020 doi

  2. [10]

    E., Zoglauer, A., Bellm, E., et al

    Boggs, S. E., Zoglauer, A., Bellm, E., et al. 2007, ApJ, 661, 458, doi: 10.1086/516732

    2007 doi

  3. [11]

    2019, A&A, 622, A137, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833972

    Bonjean, V., Aghanim, N., Salom´ e, P., et al. 2019, A&A, 622, A137, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833972

    2019 doi

  4. [12]

    C., Magnier, E

    Chambers, K. C., Magnier, E. A., Metcalfe, N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560

    2016 doi arXiv

  5. [13]

    2025, ApJ, 979, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9ea1 CHIME/FRB Collaboration, Andersen, B

    Cheng, Y., Pan, Y., Yang, Y.-P., et al. 2025, ApJ, 979, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad9ea1 CHIME/FRB Collaboration, Andersen, B. C., Bandura, K. M., et al. 2020, Nature, 587, 54, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2863-y

    2025 doi

  6. [14]

    1997, Nature, 387, 783, doi: 10.1038/42885

    Costa, E., Frontera, F., Heise, J., et al. 1997, Nature, 387, 783, doi: 10.1038/42885

    1997 doi

  7. [15]

    A., Foley, R

    Coulter, D. A., Foley, R. J., Kilpatrick, C. D., et al. 2017, Science, 358, 1556, doi: 10.1126/science.aap9811

    2017 doi

  8. [16]

    M., Tzanidakis, A., et al

    De, K., Kasliwal, M. M., Tzanidakis, A., et al. 2020, ApJ, 905, 58, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abb45c Delli Veneri, M., Cavuoti, S., Brescia, M., Longo, G., &

    2020 doi

  9. [17]

    2019, MNRAS, 486, 1377, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz856

    Riccio, G. 2019, MNRAS, 486, 1377, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stz856

    2019 doi

  10. [18]

    A., et al

    Dilday, B., Kessler, R., Frieman, J. A., et al. 2008, ApJ, 682, 262, doi: 10.1086/587733

    2008 doi

  11. [19]

    S., Adam´ ow, M., et al

    Drlica-Wagner, A., Ferguson, P. S., Adam´ ow, M., et al. 2022, ApJS, 261, 38, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ac78eb

    2022 doi

  12. [20]

    R., Chornock, R., Soderberg, A

    Drout, M. R., Chornock, R., Soderberg, A. M., et al. 2014, ApJ, 794, 23, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/794/1/23

    2014 doi

  13. [21]

    D., Klebesadel, R

    Evans, W. D., Klebesadel, R. W., Laros, J. G., et al. 1980, ApJL, 237, L7, doi: 10.1086/183222

    1980 doi

  14. [22]

    V., Li, W

    Filippenko, A. V., Li, W. D., Treffers, R. R., & Modjaz, M. 2001, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference

    2001

  15. [23]

    K., et al

    Fong, W., Berger, E., Blanchard, P. K., et al. 2017, ApJL, 848, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9018

    2017 doi

  16. [24]

    A., Bietenholz, M

    Frail, D. A., Bietenholz, M. F., & Markwardt, C. B. 1997, ApJ, 475, 224, doi: 10.1086/303537

    1997 doi

  17. [25]

    A., Manulis, I., & Bishop, D

    Gal-Yam, A., Mazzali, P. A., Manulis, I., & Bishop, D. 2013, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 125, 749, doi: 10.1086/671483

    2013 doi

  18. [26]

    Ganeshalingam, M., Li, W., & Filippenko, A. V. 2013, MNRAS, 433, 2240, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stt893

    2013 doi

  19. [27]

    V., et al

    Ganeshalingam, M., Li, W., Filippenko, A. V., et al. 2010, ApJS, 190, 418, doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/190/2/418

    2010 doi

  20. [28]

    2017, ApJL, 848, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8f41 G´ orski, K

    Goldstein, A., Veres, P., Burns, E., et al. 2017, ApJL, 848, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8f41 G´ orski, K. M., Hivon, E., Banday, A. J., et al. 2005, ApJ, 622, 759, doi: 10.1086/427976

    2017 doi

  21. [29]

    2012, Mem

    Hamuy, M., Pignata, G., Maza, J., et al. 2012, Mem. Soc. Astron. Italiana, 83, 388

    2012

  22. [30]

    R., Bennett, C

    Hinshaw, G., Nolta, M. R., Bennett, C. L., et al. 2007, ApJS, 170, 288, doi: 10.1086/513698

    2007 doi

  23. [31]

    1999, Nature, 397, 41, doi: 10.1038/16199

    Hurley, K., Cline, T., Mazets, E., et al. 1999, Nature, 397, 41, doi: 10.1038/16199

    1999 doi

  24. [32]

    E., Smith, D

    Hurley, K., Boggs, S. E., Smith, D. M., et al. 2005, Nature, 434, 1098, doi: 10.1038/nature03519

    2005 doi

  25. [33]

    J., et al

    Im, M., Yoon, Y., Lee, S.-K. J., et al. 2017, ApJL, 849, L16, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9367 Ivezi´ c,ˇZ., Kahn, S. M., Tyson, J. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 873, 111, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ab042c

    2017 doi

  26. [34]

    Kasliwal, M. M. 2012, PASA, 29, 482, doi: 10.1071/AS11061

    2012 doi

  27. [35]

    C., & Evans, N

    Kennicutt, R. C., & Evans, N. J. 2012, ARA&A, 50, 531, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-081811-125610

    2012 doi

  28. [36]

    W., Strong, I

    Klebesadel, R. W., Strong, I. B., & Olson, R. A. 1973, ApJL, 182, L85, doi: 10.1086/181225

    1973 doi

  29. [37]

    1999, A&A, 343, 775, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9901141

    Komossa, S., & Bade, N. 1999, A&A, 343, 775, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.astro-ph/9901141

    1999 doi arXiv

  30. [38]

    A., Fishman, G

    Kouveliotou, C., Meegan, C. A., Fishman, G. J., et al. 1993, ApJL, 413, L101, doi: 10.1086/186969

    1993 doi

  31. [40]

    J., Lyman, J

    Levan, A. J., Lyman, J. D., Tanvir, N. R., et al. 2017, ApJL, 848, L28, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa905f

    2017 doi

  32. [41]

    2011, MNRAS, 412, 1473, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18162.x

    Li, W., Chornock, R., Leaman, J., et al. 2011, MNRAS, 412, 1473, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18162.x

    2011

  33. [42]

    D., Filippenko, A

    Li, W. D., Filippenko, A. V., Treffers, R. R., et al. 2000, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 522, Cosmic Explosions: Tenth AstroPhysics Conference, ed. S. S. Holt & W. W. Zhang (AIP), 103–106, doi: 10.1063/1.1291702

    2000 doi

  34. [43]

    2019, in Galactic Archaeology in the Gaia Era, 14

    Liu, X. 2019, in Galactic Archaeology in the Gaia Era, 14

    2019

  35. [44]

    R., Bailes, M., McLaughlin, M

    Lorimer, D. R., Bailes, M., McLaughlin, M. A., Narkevic, D. J., & Crawford, F. 2007, Science, 318, 777, doi: 10.1126/science.1147532

    2007 doi

  36. [45]

    M., Cao, Y., et al

    Lunnan, R., Kasliwal, M. M., Cao, Y., et al. 2017, ApJ, 836, 60, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/836/1/60

    2017 doi

  37. [46]

    1998, MNRAS, 297, L17, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.01697.x 17

    Madau, P., della Valle, M., & Panagia, N. 1998, MNRAS, 297, L17, doi: 10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.01697.x 17

    1998

  38. [47]

    2006, MNRAS, 370, 773, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10501.x

    Mannucci, F., Della Valle, M., & Panagia, N. 2006, MNRAS, 370, 773, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.10501.x

    2006

  39. [48]

    2005, A&A, 433, 807, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20041411

    Mannucci, F., Della Valle, M., Panagia, N., et al. 2005, A&A, 433, 807, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361:20041411

    2005 doi

  40. [49]

    2012, PASA, 29, 447, doi: 10.1071/AS11052

    Maoz, D., & Mannucci, F. 2012, PASA, 29, 447, doi: 10.1071/AS11052

    2012 doi

  41. [50]

    2014, ARA&A, 52, 107, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-141031

    Maoz, D., Mannucci, F., & Nelemans, G. 2014, ARA&A, 52, 107, doi: 10.1146/annurev-astro-082812-141031

    2014 doi

  42. [51]

    P., & Golenetskii, S

    Mazets, E. P., & Golenetskii, S. V. 1981, Ap&SS, 75, 47, doi: 10.1007/BF00651384

    1981 doi

  43. [52]

    P., Golentskii, S

    Mazets, E. P., Golentskii, S. V., Ilinskii, V. N., Aptekar, R. L., & Guryan, I. A. 1979b, Nature, 282, 587, doi: 10.1038/282587a0

    doi

  44. [53]

    2005, ApJL, 624, L105, doi: 10.1086/430669

    Mereghetti, S., G¨ otz, D., von Kienlin, A., et al. 2005, ApJL, 624, L105, doi: 10.1086/430669

    2005 doi

  45. [54]

    2017, ApJL, 849, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9660

    Palmese, A., Hartley, W., Tarsitano, F., et al. 2017, ApJL, 849, L34, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9660

    2017 doi

  46. [55]

    C., Kilpatrick, C

    Pan, Y. C., Kilpatrick, C. D., Simon, J. D., et al. 2017, ApJL, 848, L30, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9116

    2017 doi

  47. [56]

    A., Fremling, C., Sollerman, J., et al

    Perley, D. A., Fremling, C., Sollerman, J., et al. 2020, ApJ, 904, 35, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/abbd98

    2020 doi

  48. [57]

    2009, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol

    Pignata, G., Maza, J., Antezana, R., et al. 2009, in American Institute of Physics Conference Series, Vol. 1111, Probing Stellar Populations Out to the Distant Universe: Cefalu 2008, Proceedings of the International Conference, ed. G. Giobbi, A. Tornambe, G. Raimondo, M. Limon...

    2009 doi

  49. [58]

    J., Maguire, K., Smartt, S

    Prentice, S. J., Maguire, K., Smartt, S. J., et al. 2018, ApJL, 865, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aadd90

    2018 doi

  50. [59]

    L., Lee, J

    Prieto, J. L., Lee, J. C., Drake, A. J., et al. 2012, ApJ, 745, 70, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/745/1/70

    2012 doi

  51. [60]

    2017, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1706.09516, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1706.09516

    Dorogush, A., & Gulin, A. 2017, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1706.09516, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1706.09516

    2017 doi arXiv

  52. [61]

    M., Kulkarni, S

    Quimby, R. M., Kulkarni, S. R., Kasliwal, M. M., et al. 2011, Nature, 474, 487, doi: 10.1038/nature10095

    2011 doi

  53. [62]

    Salim, S., Boquien, M., & Lee, J. C. 2018, ApJ, 859, 11, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/aabf3c

    2018 doi

  54. [63]

    C., Janowiecki, S., et al

    Salim, S., Lee, J. C., Janowiecki, S., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 227, 2, doi: 10.3847/0067-0049/227/1/2

    2016 doi

  55. [64]

    2017, ApJL, 848, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8f94

    Savchenko, V., Ferrigno, C., Kuulkers, E., et al. 2017, ApJL, 848, L15, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8f94

    2017 doi

  56. [65]

    2005, ApJL, 629, L85, doi: 10.1086/452632

    Scannapieco, E., & Bildsten, L. 2005, ApJL, 629, L85, doi: 10.1086/452632

    2005 doi

  57. [66]

    E., Annis, J., et al

    Soares-Santos, M., Holz, D. E., Annis, J., et al. 2017, ApJL, 848, L16, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9059

    2017 doi

  58. [67]

    J., et al

    Sullivan, M., Le Borgne, D., Pritchet, C. J., et al. 2006, ApJ, 648, 868, doi: 10.1086/506137

    2006 doi

  59. [68]

    2020, MNRAS, 493, 4808, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa537

    Surana, S., Wadadekar, Y., Bait, O., & Bhosale, H. 2020, MNRAS, 493, 4808, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa537

    2020 doi

  60. [69]

    Taylor, M. B. 2005, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 347, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XIV, ed. P. Shopbell, M. Britton, & R. Ebert, 29

    2005

  61. [70]

    2013, Science, 341, 53, doi: 10.1126/science.1236789

    Thornton, D., Stappers, B., Bailes, M., et al. 2013, Science, 341, 53, doi: 10.1126/science.1236789

    2013 doi

  62. [71]

    L., Denneau, L., Heinze, A

    Tonry, J. L., Denneau, L., Heinze, A. N., et al. 2018, PASP, 130, 064505, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/aabadf

    2018 doi

  63. [72]

    2008, PASJ, 60, 1327, doi: 10.1093/pasj/60.6.1327

    Totani, T., Morokuma, T., Oda, T., Doi, M., & Yasuda, N. 2008, PASJ, 60, 1327, doi: 10.1093/pasj/60.6.1327

    2008 doi

  64. [73]

    A., et al

    Tranin, H., Blagorodnova, N., G´ omez-Mu˜ noz, M. A., et al. 2026, A&A, 706, A284, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556896

    2026 doi

  65. [74]

    J., Yang, S., et al

    Valenti, S., Sand, D. J., Yang, S., et al. 2017, ApJL, 848, L24, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa8edf van Paradijs, J., Groot, P. J., Galama, T., et al. 1997, Nature, 386, 686, doi: 10.1038/386686a0

    2017 doi

  66. [75]

    L., & Han, J

    Wen, Z. L., & Han, J. L. 2024, ApJS, 272, 39, doi: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad409d

    2024 doi

  67. [76]

    E., & Bloom, J

    Woosley, S. E., & Bloom, J. S. 2006, ARA&A, 44, 507, doi: 10.1146/annurev.astro.43.072103.150558

    2006 arXiv

  68. [77]

    H., Robotham, A

    Wright, A. H., Robotham, A. S. G., Driver, S. P., et al. 2017, MNRAS, 470, 283, doi: 10.1093/mnras/stx1149

    2017 doi

  69. [78]

    L., Eisenhardt, P

    Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2010, AJ, 140, 1868, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/140/6/1868

    2010 doi

  70. [79]

    L., Eisenhardt, P

    Wright, E. L., Eisenhardt, P. R. M., Mainzer, A. K., et al. 2019, AllWISE Source Catalog, IPAC, doi: 10.26131/IRSA1

    2019 doi

  71. [80]

    2024, ApJ, 969, 126, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4be3

    Yang, Y.-P., Liu, X., Pan, Y., et al. 2024, ApJ, 969, 126, doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ad4be3

    2024 doi

  72. [81]

    2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2209.09763, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2209.09763

    Yuan, W., Zhang, C., Chen, Y., & Ling, Z. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2209.09763, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2209.09763

    2022 doi arXiv

  73. [82]

    2024, A&A, 688, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348714

    Mosallanezhad, A., & Zhang, J.-Y. 2024, A&A, 688, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348714

    2024 doi

  74. [83]

    B., Zhang, Z

    Zhang, B. B., Zhang, Z. J., Zou, J. H., et al. 2022, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2205.07670, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2205.07670

    2022 doi arXiv

  75. [84]

    2019, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1298, doi: 10.21105/joss.01298

    Zonca, A., Singer, L., Lenz, D., et al. 2019, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1298, doi: 10.21105/joss.01298

    2019 doi

  76. [85]

    2022, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 22, 065001, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/ac6416

    Zou, H., Sui, J., Xue, S., et al. 2022, Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 22, 065001, doi: 10.1088/1674-4527/ac6416

    2022 doi

  77. [86]

    1938, ApJ, 88, 529, doi: 10.1086/144007

    Zwicky, F. 1938, ApJ, 88, 529, doi: 10.1086/144007

    1938 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.